Well, presumably you wouldn't want to "capture" your own land units, as you
lose ownership upon capture. You could create public land units inside an
encircling group and then reap the rewards, but you would barely turn any
profit - you'd have to spend lots of apples running around & creating the
l
On Mon, 7 May 2018, Corona wrote:
Huh? In Japanese and Korean Go you score points (that is, your opponent
loses points, which is equivalent) for capturing stones.
Yes, but not for making a move such that your *own* stones get captured.
And don't you think it's a shame that there are all thes
Huh? In Japanese and Korean Go you score points (that is, your opponent
loses points, which is equivalent) for capturing stones.
And don't you think it's a shame that there are all these Go simulation
rules like Transfiguration and alternating land type, and the only way Land
Types are relevant to
On Sun, 6 May 2018, Corona wrote:
Land Unit A is said to be connected to Land Unit B if it is possible to
reach B by moving only to adjacent Land Units of the same Land Type,
starting from A.
Change "to" to "via", otherwise this does not allow you to go the
last step to B if it's not the same
On Sun, 6 May 2018, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> On Sat, 5 May 2018, Aris Merchant wrote:
> > Or, we could just repeal them.
>
> I use pledges. If you want to ditch something, ditch regulations.
Actually nvm I forgot how poor the enforcement mechanism for pledges
was these days - I'd say now that puni
On Sun, 6 May 2018, Ned Strange wrote:
> I object: do this by proposal
Why?
On Sat, 5 May 2018, Aris Merchant wrote:
> Or, we could just repeal them.
I use pledges. If you want to ditch something, ditch regulations.
7 matches
Mail list logo
